Network Dropouts

[magister]

(26-07-2014 02:10)Mike48 Wrote:  It seems to me that the engineering needed in audio is not terribly exotic, but it's not what audio manufacturers are used to. . . .Some high-end outfits seem to be trying to do it in house, . . .

This, I think, has been part of PS Audio's problem. They make wonderful hardware but it has taken them a while to "get" how to work best with the software end of things. They do seem to be getting better at it. Even so, I take Paul McGowan's comment seriously; if it were just a matter of adding a larger buffer, I think they would have done that early on in the development of the updated Bridge.

Quote:It seems to me that the extreme data rates starting to be pushed in audio may be overkill, . . . Still, if PS Audio's new DAC (for example) makes CDs sound as wonderful as they say, why does anyone need quad-rate DSD?

I think you may well be right about the overkill, although I have never heard quad-rate DSD so I shouldn't make pronouncements. But with PCM, I've always thought that recording at 196 or 176 would be helpful for very complex music (symphony, pipe organ, etc.), yet I have some 24/96 symphonic albums that sound world-class. I guess this all depends on things that I don't know but the engineers do. I can imagine that double-rate DSD might sound better than single, at least in some circumstances, but whether there is any benefit in going further I would question.

And, I may add, that the new PSA DAC is as good as they say. Mine has about 200 hours on it. After only a few hours it was clearly better than my PWD MkIIk, which is one of the best DACs on the market. But the DirectStream just keeps getting better, especially with redbook material. Last night I played a favorite track, ripped from CD, that I hadn't listened to for a few days. I sat up in my chair, amazed to hear a bunch of things I had never gotten before from that song. It is a very special DAC.